Do We Really Understand Disfellowship?

[shelly]

When I was younger I heard a pastor preach about how many in the church today do not truely understand what disfellowship means spiritually. He had a growing concern that disfellowship was used for disciplinary action without members understanding the full spiritual significance of the act. He explained that disfellowship was more than losing membership in the SDA church. It is more like turning someone out of the church and allowing the devil have his way with them. He asked us how many individuals who have gone through disfellowship really needed to be turned over to devil? However, as I have grown in the church I have seen the call for disfellowship over having children out of wedlock, breaking the Sabbath, adultry, and according to the church manual lying. Does the punishment really fit the crime?

[Dr. Shane]

He explained that disfellowship was more than losing membership in the SDA church. It is more like turning someone out of the church and allowing the devil have his way with them.

It sounds like your pastor friend is the one that didn't understand disfellowshipping. It is explained in the Church Manual and there is nothing in there about turning one over to the devil. My mother was disfellowshipped. When she was the pastor pleaded with her to continue coming to church. He even cried when they prayed. The church succeeded in loving her back in and she was rebaptized. My wife was also disfellowshipped and rebaptized when she was younger (before we met). My sister-in-law was disfellowshipped for getting pregnant out of wedlock and she was rebaptized while she was yet pregnant. That happened since I have been a member here and I shared it here.

The purpose of any church discipline is to reconcile the member with God. It is a very delicate matter and needs to be done with the right spirit. Too often it is either not done at all, or it is done poorly. We can allow the devil to have his way with a believer by not doing anything at all. I think whenever church discipline is done it should be done by a pastor along with friends of the member being disciplined. The member needs to know our concern for their spiritual well-being is our motivation. We also need to continue to follow up with the person after disfellowship and let them know they are wanted by the church.

[shelly]

I know what it says in the church manual, but biblically what the pastor was right. When Paul recommended disfellowship, it was to turn the individual over to the devil. Biblical disfellowship is different than what the church uses it as. Disfellowship isn't for discipline it is an act of last resorte. It is like firing an employee and then telling them they can be rehired. Just because disfellowship has some success stories doesn't mean it was applied correctly.

[cricket]

A person who needs to be disfellowshipped in the "Biblical" sense is one who won't seek to return to the church anyway.

[Sonny]

I left the local SDA church in 1997. I wasn't disfellowshipped, but I'm sure some didn't shed a tear when I left. I was hard on them because I felt they were teaching a subtle form of legalism. And I still do today. However I have hope of the SDA church. I do believe it will be this church that will recapture the every lasting gospel that Paul preached back in his day.

I finally was visited by an older lady from that local SDA church. I told she was the first in 14 years and I appreciated her coming by. So I guess my name is still on the church records?

[shelly]

So we are saying how the church uses disfellowship superceeds the biblical use for disfellowship?

[ClubV12]

Shelly, I'm not exactly sure of what you mean by superceeding the biblical version but I suspet it is:

Paul promoted the idea that some folks should be entirely removed from church fellowship, not to eat with them or associate with them at all. In some cases, he is correct! Notably those who show no repentance and continue to live in open sin. But what of those who DO show sincere repentance? Disfellowship is still required in some cases, regardless. It is to show to the church and to the community that certain minimum standards apply. It is this message that needs to be put forth, the poor repentant sinner "gets the idea", and accepts his fate as necessary. After a period of fellowship and sincere repentance rebaptism is offered.

It is NOT offered, nor is fellowship, for those who show no repentance.

[cricket]

So we are saying how the church uses disfellowship superceeds the biblical use for disfellowship?

I'm not saying that at all. Others might be, but I'm not saying that. It is my opinion that the church misuses the right to disfellowship their members. Instead, when they feel that disfellowshiping a member (in the church manual sense) is necessary, they ought to recognize this as a call for help in guiding the member back into a relationship with Christ. Usually at this time in a member's life he is in dire need to reconnect with his brothers and sisters in Christ, but needs the loving guidance of the church at its finest. It is past the time for "scolding" its members, and is now a time of "reclaiming".

Feel free to have a different opinion, but this is mine and it's not changing.

[ClubV12]

We are mostly in agreement with that concept Cricket. My only dispute would be your comment that alludes to a position that disfellowship is to often abused. That may not be entirely accurate on a percentage basis.

[shelly]

Shelly, I'm not exactly sure of what you mean by superceeding the biblical version but I suspet it is:

Paul promoted the idea that some folks should be entirely removed from church fellowship, not to eat with them or associate with them at all. In some cases, he is correct! Notably those who show no repentance and continue to live in open sin. But what of those who DO show sincere repentance? Disfellowship is still required in some cases, regardless. It is to show to the church and to the community that certain minimum standards apply. It is this message that needs to be put forth, the poor repentant sinner "gets the idea", and accepts his fate as necessary. After a period of fellowship and sincere repentance rebaptism is offered.

It is NOT offered, nor is fellowship, for those who show no repentance.

The bolded is what I disagree with. The bible uses disfellowship only when the individual is unrepentant of their sin. The church does not do this. It uses it as a form of punishment to those who have already expressed remorse and the intention to correct their behavior. Disfellowship is used too much and incorrectly according to the bible. The church manual allows someone to be disfellowshiped for breaking any of the commandments-so I guess everyone needs to repent and be rebaptised every so often.

[shelly]

I can't quite wrap my head around disfellowshipping someone and then inviting them to come to church and fellowship. Either their sin is enough to be removed from fellowship or it is not. You can't have it both ways. What the local congregation is really wanting is to suspend membership-not disfellowship. If the disciplined individual is still attending services, potluck, bible study they have not been disfellowshipped. Their have simply had their membership revolked and are now fellowshipping as a visitor.

[ClubV12]

There is another option Shelly, it doesn't always have to be disfellowhsip, which should be reserved for the only the most serious options. Censure, a time of discipline short of removal, or removal from office, there are steps that can and should be be taken before even discipline is handed out. As to actual "on the books membership" I think that requires disfellowship itself? I don't think there is any other way to remove membership (short of a request and other particulars).

Of course ANY action assumes the steps to counsel, love and prayer have already been taken and yet, the problem remains unresolved. In the case of public sin, a public statement needs to be made. Disfellowship cannot be done by the board, that is a public function of the church acting on the boards suggestion. Censure and discipline can be done without the entire body of believers being involved, some things should remain private.

Of course the entire process should be one of love and the hope is to save your brother from the error of his ways. Disfellowship and NOT accepting one into church fellowship (worship) is the most serious case of all, a rare situation. I think you can have it both ways.

[CoAspen]

Let's make it simple...does Christ abandon us or do we abandon Him? Not allowing someone to come to church because they have been 'disfellowshipped' is not Biblical. If there is potential harm to the chuch or congregation, that would be a seperate issue.

[ClubV12]

Paul said to do it, he was an author of the bible, so it IS in fact biblical.

...well, unless you believe Pauls statement was uninspired, some actually believe that.

"If there is potential harm to the chuch or congregation, that would be a seperate issue."

That is part and parcel to the discussion, can't remove it.

[Dr. Shane]

When Paul recommended disfellowship, it was to turn the individual over to the devil.

Where does Paul recommend turning struggling church members over to the devil? Please provide Bible verses.

[Dr. Shane]

Paul promoted the idea that some folks should be entirely removed from church fellowship, not to eat with them or associate with them at all... Disfellowship is still required in some cases.. to show to the church and to the community that certain minimum standards apply... After a period of fellowship and sincere repentance rebaptism is offered.

It is NOT offered, nor is fellowship, for those who show no repentance.

I pretty much agree with this although I would add that disfellowshipping also dramatically demonstrates to the fallen member that they are living outside the will of God. It is a "come-to-Jesus" moment that hopefully results in their eventual repentance.

Also, while we are not to be hanging out with the disfellowshipped members, that does not mean the door isn't open for their return. Nor does it mean we don't stop by and visit them with the intention of inviting them back to the fold. What we are not to do is to carry on with them as if nothing happened and nothing is wrong. I see no where that we are instructed to turn them over to the devil.

[Dr. Shane]

when they feel that disfellowshiping a member (in the church manual sense) is necessary, they ought to recognize this as a call for help in guiding the member back into a relationship with Christ.

Disfellowshipping is not to be done until all efforts to guide them back to Christ have been exhausted. Also, disfellowshipping CANNOT be done by the church board. The church board can recommend disfellowshipping but it must be done at a church business meeting where all members are invited and all in attendance vote. Furthermore, the person being disfellowshipped is to be invited to defend themselves if they believe they do not deserve to be disfellowshipped. This is no light matter done by a small committee behind closed doors.

[cricket]

Immorality Rebuked

1 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. 2 [a]You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst.

3 For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough? 7 Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; 10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. 11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? 13 But those who are outside, Godjudges. REMOVE THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.

[cricket]

Originally Posted By: cricket

when they feel that disfellowshiping a member (in the church manual sense) is necessary, they ought to recognize this as a call for help in guiding the member back into a relationship with Christ.

Disfellowshipping is not to be done until all efforts to guide them back to Christ have been exhausted. Also, disfellowshipping CANNOT be done by the church board. The church board can recommend disfellowshipping but it must be done at a church business meeting where all members are invited and all in attendance vote. Furthermore, the person being disfellowshipped is to be invited to defend themselves if they believe they do not deserve to be disfellowshipped. This is no light matter done by a small committee behind closed doors.

That's a great policy, but it doesn't always work that way. That's why I said earlier in this thread that the practice of disfellowshipping church members is often abused.

[Dr. Shane]

The bible uses disfellowship only when the individual is unrepentant of their sin. The church does not do this. It uses it as a form of punishment to those who have already expressed remorse and the intention to correct their behavior.

[Dr. Shane]

I can't quite wrap my head around disfellowshipping someone and then inviting them to come to church and fellowship. Either their sin is enough to be removed from fellowship or it is not.

[Dr. Shane]

4 In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

The wording in this verse may mislead some but it is not saying to abandon a fallen member to Satan. "Delivering one to Satan" simply means denying the person church fellowship. The purpose is explained in the very same verse: "That his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." The purpose of deny fellowship is to cause the person to repent. The verse is not telling the church to abandon a fallen member to Satan. I think most Bible commentaries will confirm that position.

[Dr. Shane]

That's a great policy, but it doesn't always work that way. That's why I said earlier in this thread that the practice of disfellowshipping church members is often abused.

The policy I outlined is from the Church Manual. Congregations that do not follow it should be reported to the local conference. I was a member of a local congregation that did not follow it and a number of us wrote letters to the local conference and the pastor was told he needed to look for work in another conference as a result.

[cricket]

What saith the commentaries about "for the destruction of his flesh"?

[Dr. Shane]

As I understand it, "for the destruction of his flesh" is a poetic way of saying repentance.